Do Playful Parenting Programs Implemented at Scale Improve Caregiver Practices and Child Development?

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
Carina Omoeva, Rafael Contreras Gomez, Rachel Hatch, Frances Aboud, Ania Chaluda, Given Hapunda, Karma Choden, Francis Sichimba, Ksenija Krstić, Jill Popp
{"title":"Do Playful Parenting Programs Implemented at Scale Improve Caregiver Practices and Child Development?","authors":"Carina Omoeva, Rafael Contreras Gomez, Rachel Hatch, Frances Aboud, Ania Chaluda, Given Hapunda, Karma Choden, Francis Sichimba, Ksenija Krstić, Jill Popp","doi":"10.3390/children12091241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: As an independent research group, we examined parent and child outcomes of three different parenting programs delivered at scale. The programs were implemented in Bhutan, Serbia and Zambia by different organizations. <b>Methods</b>: Mixed methods included a caregiver interview using the HOME Inventory, a direct child assessment using the Global Scales of Early Development (GSED) and focus group discussions with caregivers (FGD). Sampled mothers and children were randomly selected for the HOME/GSED: Bhutan <i>n</i> = 432, Serbia <i>n</i> = 636, Zambia <i>n</i> = 1024. Over 40 mothers and fathers of children under 3 years were purposively selected for FGD. Intention-to-treat and secondary regression analyses of attendees and non-attendees were conducted on the HOME and GSED; FGDs were subject to content analysis. <b>Results</b>: Parenting practices were found to be minimally (Bhutan) or modestly (Zambia) higher for caregivers who attended group sessions. Caregivers in Serbia who recalled receiving play messages had higher HOME scores. Child outcomes showed small (Bhutan) or no differences (Serbia, Zambia) associated with participation. <b>Conclusions</b>: Explanations focused on limits to program participation in scaled programs, the need for pilot evaluations to ensure that the program design is effective, and the need to monitor delivery quality and other implementation processes.</p>","PeriodicalId":48588,"journal":{"name":"Children-Basel","volume":"12 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12468060/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Children-Basel","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/children12091241","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives: As an independent research group, we examined parent and child outcomes of three different parenting programs delivered at scale. The programs were implemented in Bhutan, Serbia and Zambia by different organizations. Methods: Mixed methods included a caregiver interview using the HOME Inventory, a direct child assessment using the Global Scales of Early Development (GSED) and focus group discussions with caregivers (FGD). Sampled mothers and children were randomly selected for the HOME/GSED: Bhutan n = 432, Serbia n = 636, Zambia n = 1024. Over 40 mothers and fathers of children under 3 years were purposively selected for FGD. Intention-to-treat and secondary regression analyses of attendees and non-attendees were conducted on the HOME and GSED; FGDs were subject to content analysis. Results: Parenting practices were found to be minimally (Bhutan) or modestly (Zambia) higher for caregivers who attended group sessions. Caregivers in Serbia who recalled receiving play messages had higher HOME scores. Child outcomes showed small (Bhutan) or no differences (Serbia, Zambia) associated with participation. Conclusions: Explanations focused on limits to program participation in scaled programs, the need for pilot evaluations to ensure that the program design is effective, and the need to monitor delivery quality and other implementation processes.

Abstract Image

大规模实施好玩的育儿计划能改善照顾者的做法和儿童的发展吗?
背景/目的:作为一个独立的研究小组,我们研究了三种不同的大规模育儿计划的父母和孩子的结果。这些项目由不同的组织在不丹、塞尔维亚和赞比亚实施。方法:混合方法包括使用HOME量表对照顾者进行访谈,使用全球早期发展量表(GSED)对儿童进行直接评估,以及与照顾者进行焦点小组讨论(FGD)。抽样的母亲和儿童被随机选择参加HOME/GSED:不丹n = 432,塞尔维亚n = 636,赞比亚n = 1024。有针对性地选择了40多名3岁以下儿童的母亲和父亲进行FGD。对参会者和非参会者进行HOME和GSED的意向治疗和二次回归分析;对fgd进行内容分析。结果:对于参加小组会议的照顾者来说,育儿实践被发现最低限度(不丹)或适度(赞比亚)更高。在塞尔维亚,回忆起收到游戏信息的看护人有更高的HOME得分。儿童的结果显示,与参与相关的差异很小(不丹)或没有差异(塞尔维亚、赞比亚)。结论:解释集中在规模项目参与的限制,试点评估的必要性,以确保项目设计的有效性,以及监控交付质量和其他实施过程的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Children-Basel
Children-Basel PEDIATRICS-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
1735
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Children is an international, open access journal dedicated to a streamlined, yet scientifically rigorous, dissemination of peer-reviewed science related to childhood health and disease in developed and developing countries. The publication focuses on sharing clinical, epidemiological and translational science relevant to children’s health. Moreover, the primary goals of the publication are to highlight under‑represented pediatric disciplines, to emphasize interdisciplinary research and to disseminate advances in knowledge in global child health. In addition to original research, the journal publishes expert editorials and commentaries, clinical case reports, and insightful communications reflecting the latest developments in pediatric medicine. By publishing meritorious articles as soon as the editorial review process is completed, rather than at predefined intervals, Children also permits rapid open access sharing of new information, allowing us to reach the broadest audience in the most expedient fashion.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信